Accès libre

Relative egg extraction efficiencies of manual and automated fecal egg count methods in equines

L. Britton
L. Britton
, 
B. Ripley
B. Ripley
 et 
P. Slusarewicz
P. Slusarewicz
   | 23 avr. 2024
Helminthologia's Cover Image
À propos de cet article
Article précédent
Article suivant
Citez
Article Category: Research Article
Publié en ligne: 23 avr. 2024
Pages: 20 - 29
Reçu: 12 déc. 2023
Accepté: 18 févr. 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/helm-2024-0007
Mots clés
© 2024 L. Britton et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Fig. 1.

Comparison of Parasight AIO counting algorithm to human analyst enumeration for both strongylid (A) and ascarid (B) ova. Triplicate images for each sample were analyzed both computationally and manually and the averages of each result plotted against each other.
Comparison of Parasight AIO counting algorithm to human analyst enumeration for both strongylid (A) and ascarid (B) ova. Triplicate images for each sample were analyzed both computationally and manually and the averages of each result plotted against each other.

Fig. 2.

Fluorescence imaging of parasite ova. A portion from a representative image taken with the Parasight AIO unit showing both strongylid and ascarid ova. The mesh of the egg chamber is visible in the background. Bar = 200 μm.
Fluorescence imaging of parasite ova. A portion from a representative image taken with the Parasight AIO unit showing both strongylid and ascarid ova. The mesh of the egg chamber is visible in the background. Bar = 200 μm.

Fig. 3.

Comparison of mini-FLOTAC counts against counts of the same samples by Parasight AIO (A), Imagyst (B), McMaster (C) and Wisconsin (D). Each point is the average of three counts of the same sample by each method. Strongyle counts (blue) and ascarid counts (magenta) were plotted separately and fitted by linear regression to provide two lines whose equations and coefficients of determinations are displayed next to them.
Comparison of mini-FLOTAC counts against counts of the same samples by Parasight AIO (A), Imagyst (B), McMaster (C) and Wisconsin (D). Each point is the average of three counts of the same sample by each method. Strongyle counts (blue) and ascarid counts (magenta) were plotted separately and fitted by linear regression to provide two lines whose equations and coefficients of determinations are displayed next to them.

Summary of the average number of eggs counted (EC) across all samples in the dataset for both strongyles and ascarids. Eggs counted were converted to eggs/gram (EPG) values by multiplication of EC by the appropriate multiplication factor (MF) for the method. The magnitude of the difference of EC and EPG relative to the mini-FLOTAC (mFT) method are also shown (EC vs. mFT and EPG vs. MFT).

Method MF Strongyles
 Ascarids
EC EPG EC vs mFT EPG vs mFT EC EPG EC vs mFT EPG vs mFT
Wisconsin 1 404.3 404.3 3.59 0.72 282.0 282.0 2.88 0.58
Parasight 1 381.2 381.2 3.38 0.68 273.9 273.9 2.80 0.56
mini-FLOTAC 5 112.7 563.3 1.00 1.00 97.8 489.0 1.00 1.00
McMaster 25 23.9 597.8 0.21 1.06 14.3 358.3 0.15 0.73
Imagyst N/A 41.6 N/A 0.37 N/A 17.9 N/A 0.18 N/A

Number of ascarid ova observed in each replicate count from the Low group samples for both the McMaster and Imagyst methods.

Sample Count (EPG) McMaster
 Imagyst
Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3
A 12 0 2 1 0 0 0
B 10 0 0 1 0 1 0
C 65 7 0 2 4 2 1
D 93 3 0 0 3 2 7
E 107 3 4 3 2 0 5
F 155 16 18 16 0 6 7
G 20 3 1 0 3 0 0
H 65 2 2 2 5 5 1
I 98 3 1 3 4 2 2
J 50 1 1 1 2 2 5

Mean numbers of strongylid and ascarid ova counted by each method in each count group and for all groups combined. n = number of positive samples in the indicated group.

Parasite Group n McMaster mini-FLOTAC Wisconsin Imagyst Parasight
Strongylids H 10 48.9 220.8 822.4 84.4 730.8
M 10 18.5 92.2 303.4 31.6 339.7
L 10 4.4 25.1 87.0 8.7 82.5
All 30 23.9 112.7 404.3 41.6 381.2
Ascarids H 5 42.1 304.4 923.7 51.3 941.4
M 7 10.4 70.7 171.0 16.3 134.6
L 10 3.2 13.5 38.8 2.4 37.6
All 22 14.3 97.8 282.0 17.9 273.9
eISSN:
1336-9083
Langue:
Anglais
Périodicité:
4 fois par an
Sujets de la revue:
Life Sciences, Zoology, Ecology, other, Medicine, Clinical Medicine, Microbiology, Virology and Infection Epidemiology
RSS Feed de la revue